Search for: "AT&T"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 881,583
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Dec 2011, 11:01 am
The two cited decisions T 569/02 and T 718/98 concern two cases different from the present wherein very shortly (i.e. one month and about one week, respectively) before the date of the scheduled OPs before the Board experimental evidence and other documents were submitted by parties, which then in accordance with the established case law decided not to admit these documents into the proceedings (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 6th edition 2010, chapter VII.C.1.3.4). [1.2.2]… [read post]
17 Jan 2010, 3:02 pm
This incorrectness necessarily shed doubt on the indication concerning the legal person of the appellant because an error concerning the opposing company can also indicate an error concerning the appealing company. [2] Decisions T 97/98 and T 340/92 act on the assumption that an incorrect or erroneous indication concerning the person of the appellant cannot be treated more strictly on a legal level than the omission of the indication of the identity of the appellant. [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 3:01 pm
Use of rimcazole for the preparation of a medicament for the preferential induction of apoptosis in a first population of cells compared to a second population of cells, wherein the cells of the first population are tumour cells.[1] A 84 stipulates inter alia that the claims shall be clear. [2] The meaning of a claim is determined from the skilled person’s point of view reading the claim with his/her background knowledge in the context of all of the claims and the whole specification. [3]… [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 5:01 pm
This has the consequence that they are deemed not to have been filed. [5] The board is aware that anonymously filed TPO may nevertheless be adopted by a party to the proceedings as its own or may even trigger objections by the competent organ of the EPO of its own motion (see decision T 735/04 [2], dealing with the exceptional situation that a highly relevant patent application of one of the patent proprietors had been submitted by an anonymous third party). [read post]
6 May 2012, 5:01 pm
They relied in this respect on decision T 692/09. [read post]
16 Dec 2009, 3:10 pm
It referred therefore merely to the recognition of a disclosure in the state of the art, which according to the case law of the Boards of Appeal, e.g. decision T 11/82, cannot be regarded as added subject-matter. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm
Therefore, the skilled person would arrive at the compounds according to the invention without exercising any inventive activity (see T 288/98 [2.10]).[3.7] In its trials D12 and D13 the [patent proprietor] has also shown that the safener (B1-9) displays a higher activity when the pyridylsulfonylurea derivative H.2 tested in document D10 is replaced by the (A1) compound according to the impugned patent. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 5:01 pm
T 240/95 [4.2]), the disclosure of a range is an explicit disclosure of the end values. [read post]
22 May 2011, 3:01 pm
It should at least be plausible from the disclosure that its teaching does indeed solve the problem it purports to solve (T 1329/04 [12]). [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 11:01 am
This finding is, as pointed out by the Appellant, supported by T 1170/02 and T 956/07. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm
The Board is of the opinion that it follows from this principle of legal security that claims are to be considered as lacking clarity within the meaning of A 84 if they do not allow to draw that distinction (see T 337/95 [2.2-5]). [read post]
22 Sep 2007, 11:44 am
It won't allow Taiwan to join the UN. [read post]
20 May 2013, 5:01 pm
T 34/90, G 9/91 and G 10/91 [18]). [read post]
11 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm
J 19/90 [3.1.1], T 445/98 [3.2.1], T 778/00 [3.2.4], T 275/86 [3.3.1]). [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 4:14 am
Reverse Nullification and Executive Discretion by Michael T. [read post]
4 Aug 2007, 6:56 am
When will all the rhetorical questions finally end? [read post]
16 Feb 2010, 5:24 pm
Seen on the street in Phila.: "Support Safe Sex: Go Fuck Yourself! [read post]
24 May 2008, 2:22 pm
The Roanoke paper reports here on the interesting life and times of the Rocky Mount lawyer, who wrote about the Franklin County moonshine case, as described here, tried in Harrisonburg before Judge John Paul. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 4:40 pm
yes, tobacco survey results are in. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 3:01 pm
Therefore, the examination of whether the proposed solution successfully solves this problem is limited to the other features of claim 1 (T 22/81 [5.1,7]; T 26/01 [4.3] and T 176/04 [5.5]). [read post]
